The Destiny of “Tradition” in the Modern World: A Comparative Analysis of the Concepts of E. Hobsbawm and S. Eisenstadt

Yulia S. Obidina
{"title":"The Destiny of “Tradition” in the Modern World: A Comparative Analysis of the Concepts of E. Hobsbawm and S. Eisenstadt","authors":"Yulia S. Obidina","doi":"10.31483/r-102802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conflicting assessments of the nature and role of traditions in the modern world stem in part from differences in the use of the term; the specific phenomena that are the focus of each perspective differ in some important respects. This opens up the possibility that seemingly contradictory conclusions about the role of traditions in contemporary societies can be reconciled. The article discusses the role and influence of traditions for the analysis of the modern socio-cultural situation from the point of view of two approaches: the concept of invented tradition by Eric Hobsbawm and the concept of multiple modernities by Shmuel Eisenstadt. The purpose of the article is to give a comparative analysis of the two approaches to tradition, showing that modernity is not a culturally neutral, universal socio-cultural product, but is formed under the influence of many traditions. Based on the method of comparative analysis, it was revealed that the concept of multiple modernities by Shmuel Eisenstadt, as well as the concept of invented tradition by Eric Hobsbawm, contradict the view of the classical theory of modernization on modernity as a break with tradition. At the same time, the meaning that Eisenstadt attaches to tradition differs markedly from that proposed by E. Hobsbawm. It is concluded that from the point of view of the theory of multiple modernities, the invention of new traditions in modernity is better understood as a process of transformation, and that the reconstruction of a tradition is not the same as invention. In both cases, both for the transformation and reconstruction of the tradition, the sociocultural context is important.","PeriodicalId":34667,"journal":{"name":"Etnicheskaia kul''tura","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Etnicheskaia kul''tura","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31483/r-102802","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The conflicting assessments of the nature and role of traditions in the modern world stem in part from differences in the use of the term; the specific phenomena that are the focus of each perspective differ in some important respects. This opens up the possibility that seemingly contradictory conclusions about the role of traditions in contemporary societies can be reconciled. The article discusses the role and influence of traditions for the analysis of the modern socio-cultural situation from the point of view of two approaches: the concept of invented tradition by Eric Hobsbawm and the concept of multiple modernities by Shmuel Eisenstadt. The purpose of the article is to give a comparative analysis of the two approaches to tradition, showing that modernity is not a culturally neutral, universal socio-cultural product, but is formed under the influence of many traditions. Based on the method of comparative analysis, it was revealed that the concept of multiple modernities by Shmuel Eisenstadt, as well as the concept of invented tradition by Eric Hobsbawm, contradict the view of the classical theory of modernization on modernity as a break with tradition. At the same time, the meaning that Eisenstadt attaches to tradition differs markedly from that proposed by E. Hobsbawm. It is concluded that from the point of view of the theory of multiple modernities, the invention of new traditions in modernity is better understood as a process of transformation, and that the reconstruction of a tradition is not the same as invention. In both cases, both for the transformation and reconstruction of the tradition, the sociocultural context is important.
“传统”在现代世界的命运——E.霍布斯鲍姆和S.艾森斯塔特概念的比较分析
对传统在现代世界中的性质和作用的相互矛盾的评估部分源于该术语的使用差异;每个视角关注的具体现象在一些重要方面有所不同。这开启了一种可能性,即关于传统在当代社会中的作用的看似矛盾的结论可以得到调和。本文从两个角度论述了传统在分析现代社会文化状况中的作用和影响:埃里克·霍布斯鲍姆的发明传统概念和施梅尔·艾森斯塔特的多重现代化概念。本文的目的是对这两种传统方法进行比较分析,表明现代性不是一种文化中立、普遍的社会文化产品,而是在许多传统的影响下形成的。运用比较分析的方法,揭示了施梅尔·艾森斯塔特的“多重现代化”概念和埃里克·霍布斯鲍姆的“发明传统”概念与古典现代化理论关于现代性与传统决裂的观点相矛盾。同时,艾森斯塔特对传统的重视与霍布斯鲍姆提出的不同。结论是,从多重现代化理论的角度来看,现代性中新传统的发明更好地理解为一个转变的过程,传统的重建与发明不同。在这两种情况下,无论是对传统的改造还是重建,社会文化语境都是重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信